This table attempts to explain the mappings between the new VCard ontology and two other vocabulariees commonly used to describe people, the W3C's PIM vocabulary and the community-driven FOAF vocabulary. However, neither of these vocabularies is isomorphic to the VCard (and thus hCard) and as such a new vocabulary had to be created.

Note that this table contains the RDF and OWL statements needed to formalize these relationships in Embedded RDF so that a formal description of these mappings can be easily extracted via a GRDDL transformation.

@@TODO: Why not make mobile, home, etc. (types in VCard) classes instead of properties, so you just have one class called phone so that everything object of a v:tel relationship is a "phone", and then to distinguish between phones by virtue of sub-classing them for mobile, home, etc? Is it the fact that this data might be lost in RDF graph merging? Yet if the properties have the right domain and ranges, they should not.

@@TODO: Why the unlabelled prefix for some properties?

@@TODO: Someone more familiar with PIM should check how I used the address property and the W3C PIM _addressProperty.

@@TODO: In W3C PIM we map from People to their Contactlocations which in turn have addresses, phone numbers, etc. and in vCard addresses are mapped to types (like "home"), which seem like they should be sub-classes of ContactLocations.

@@TODO: It should be noted in the text that the VCard Ontology carries the same exceptions as hCard, i.e. not encoding: NAME, PROFILE, SOURCE, PRODID, VERSION